Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NZAPALI v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 08.12.2005 - 74762/01

  MAHDID ET HADDAR c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.11.2015 - 6107/07

  The Court reiterates that, pursuant to Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, the Court "may only deal with the matter after all domestic remedies have been exhausted, according to the generally recognised rules of international law." Further, it has consistently held that domestic remedies cannot be said to have been exhausted when an appeal has been rejected or not allowed because of a procedural mistake on the part of the appellant (see Mahdid and Haddar v. Austria (dec.), no. 74762/01, ECHR 2005-XIII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 03.04.2001 - 27229/95

  KEENAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.11.2015 - 6107/07

  Treatment or punishment has been held to be "degrading" when it was such as to arouse in its victims feelings of fear, anguish and inferiority capable of humiliating and debasing them and possibly breaking their physical or moral resistance, or when it was such as to drive the victims to act against their will or conscience (see, inter alia, Keenan v. the United Kingdom, no. 27229/95, § 110, ECHR 2001-III, and Jalloh, cited above, § 68).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.11.2015 - 6107/07

  The Court has considered treatment to be "inhuman" because, inter alia, it was premeditated, was applied for hours at a stretch and caused either actual bodily injury or intense physical and mental suffering (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 120, ECHR 2000-IV, and Ramirez Sanchez v. France [GC], no. 59450/00, § 118, ECHR 2006-IX).
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.11.2015 - 6107/07

  If it is to be assumed that the applicant intended to invoke this provision in conjunction with the alleged violations of Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention, the Court further reiterates that, according to its case-law, Article 13 applies only where an individual has an "arguable claim" to be the victim of a violation of a Convention right (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, 27 April 1988, § 52, Series A no. 131).
• EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 54810/00

  Einsatz von Brechmitteln; Selbstbelastungsfreiheit (Schutzbereich; faires …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.11.2015 - 6107/07

  The assessment of this minimum depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical or mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age and state of health of the victim (see Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 162, Series A no. 25, and Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no. 54810/00, § 67, ECHR 2006-IX).

• EGMR, 08.02.2022 - 16473/19

  F.T. AND RAKHMANOV v. RUSSIA

  In view of the above conclusion, the applicant had no "arguable claim" to be the victim of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, § 52, and Nzapali v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 6107/07, § 36, 17 November 2015).
• EGMR, 06.09.2022 - 16769/20

  YORDANOF c. GRÈCE

  Le grief fondé sur l'article 3 ayant été déclaré irrecevable, la Cour estime que le requérant n'a aucun grief défendable aux fins de l'article 13 de la Convention (Boyle et Rice c. Royaume-Uni, arrêt du 27 avril 1988, § 52, série A no 131, et Nzapali c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 6107/07, § 36, 17 novembre 2015).